Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Aims: Very few of the risk scores to predict infection in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have been validated, and reports on their differences. We aimed to validate and compare the discriminatory value of different risk...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2020.621002/full |
| _version_ | 1818569799053082624 |
|---|---|
| author | Yuanhui Liu Yuanhui Liu Yuanhui Liu Litao Wang Wei Chen Lihuan Zeng Hualin Fan Chongyang Duan Yining Dai Jiyan Chen Ling Xue Pengcheng He Pengcheng He Pengcheng He Ning Tan Ning Tan Ning Tan |
| author_facet | Yuanhui Liu Yuanhui Liu Yuanhui Liu Litao Wang Wei Chen Lihuan Zeng Hualin Fan Chongyang Duan Yining Dai Jiyan Chen Ling Xue Pengcheng He Pengcheng He Pengcheng He Ning Tan Ning Tan Ning Tan |
| author_sort | Yuanhui Liu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Aims: Very few of the risk scores to predict infection in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have been validated, and reports on their differences. We aimed to validate and compare the discriminatory value of different risk scores for infection.Methods: A total of 2,260 eligible patients with STEMI undergoing PCI from January 2010 to May 2018 were enrolled. Six risk scores were investigated: age, serum creatinine, or glomerular filtration rate, and ejection fraction (ACEF or AGEF) score; Canada Acute Coronary Syndrome (CACS) risk score; CHADS2 score; Global Registry for Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score; and Mehran score conceived for contrast induced nephropathy. The primary endpoint was infection during hospitalization.Results: Except CHADS2 score (AUC, 0.682; 95%CI, 0.652–0.712), the other risk scores showed good discrimination for predicting infection. All risk scores but CACS risk score (calibration slope, 0.77; 95%CI, 0.18–1.35) showed best calibration for infection. The risks scores also showed good discrimination for in-hospital major adverse clinical events (MACE) (AUC range, 0.700–0.786), except for CHADS2 score. All six risk scores showed best calibration for in-hospital MACE. Subgroup analysis demonstrated similar results.Conclusions: The ACEF, AGEF, CACS, GRACE, and Mehran scores showed a good discrimination and calibration for predicting infection and MACE. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T06:52:25Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-93ef8bba2fbc425f85d222843a747b02 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2297-055X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T06:52:25Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine |
| spelling | doaj.art-93ef8bba2fbc425f85d222843a747b022022-12-21T23:12:51ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine2297-055X2021-01-01710.3389/fcvm.2020.621002621002Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary InterventionYuanhui Liu0Yuanhui Liu1Yuanhui Liu2Litao Wang3Wei Chen4Lihuan Zeng5Hualin Fan6Chongyang Duan7Yining Dai8Jiyan Chen9Ling Xue10Pengcheng He11Pengcheng He12Pengcheng He13Ning Tan14Ning Tan15Ning Tan16Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaSchool of Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, ChinaThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, ChinaSchool of Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, ChinaFujian Provincial Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiology, Fujian Provincial Center for Geriatrics, Fujian Cardiovascular Institute, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Provincial Clinical Medicine College of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaSchool of Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, ChinaDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, ChinaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaSchool of Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, ChinaThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, ChinaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, ChinaSchool of Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, ChinaThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, ChinaAims: Very few of the risk scores to predict infection in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have been validated, and reports on their differences. We aimed to validate and compare the discriminatory value of different risk scores for infection.Methods: A total of 2,260 eligible patients with STEMI undergoing PCI from January 2010 to May 2018 were enrolled. Six risk scores were investigated: age, serum creatinine, or glomerular filtration rate, and ejection fraction (ACEF or AGEF) score; Canada Acute Coronary Syndrome (CACS) risk score; CHADS2 score; Global Registry for Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score; and Mehran score conceived for contrast induced nephropathy. The primary endpoint was infection during hospitalization.Results: Except CHADS2 score (AUC, 0.682; 95%CI, 0.652–0.712), the other risk scores showed good discrimination for predicting infection. All risk scores but CACS risk score (calibration slope, 0.77; 95%CI, 0.18–1.35) showed best calibration for infection. The risks scores also showed good discrimination for in-hospital major adverse clinical events (MACE) (AUC range, 0.700–0.786), except for CHADS2 score. All six risk scores showed best calibration for in-hospital MACE. Subgroup analysis demonstrated similar results.Conclusions: The ACEF, AGEF, CACS, GRACE, and Mehran scores showed a good discrimination and calibration for predicting infection and MACE.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2020.621002/fullrisk scoreinfectionST-segment elevation myocardial infarctionpercutaneous coronary interventionmajor adverse clinical events |
| spellingShingle | Yuanhui Liu Yuanhui Liu Yuanhui Liu Litao Wang Wei Chen Lihuan Zeng Hualin Fan Chongyang Duan Yining Dai Jiyan Chen Ling Xue Pengcheng He Pengcheng He Pengcheng He Ning Tan Ning Tan Ning Tan Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine risk score infection ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction percutaneous coronary intervention major adverse clinical events |
| title | Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention |
| title_full | Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention |
| title_fullStr | Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention |
| title_full_unstemmed | Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention |
| title_short | Validation and Comparison of Six Risk Scores for Infection in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention |
| title_sort | validation and comparison of six risk scores for infection in patients with st segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention |
| topic | risk score infection ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction percutaneous coronary intervention major adverse clinical events |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2020.621002/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yuanhuiliu validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT yuanhuiliu validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT yuanhuiliu validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT litaowang validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT weichen validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT lihuanzeng validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT hualinfan validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT chongyangduan validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT yiningdai validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT jiyanchen validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT lingxue validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT pengchenghe validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT pengchenghe validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT pengchenghe validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT ningtan validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT ningtan validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT ningtan validationandcomparisonofsixriskscoresforinfectioninpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionundergoingpercutaneouscoronaryintervention |